UKC

Coronavirus - I wonder...

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Yanis Nayu 10 May 2020

If the counties with the tightest initial lockdowns will have a higher rate of increase post-lockdown? I’m also intrigued by the apparently low rates of infection in developing countries- I read something the other day about how the virus doesn’t seem to be sweeping through densely-populated Indian slums with poor sanitation. Many unanswered questions. 

 off-duty 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> If the counties with the tightest initial lockdowns will have a higher rate of increase post-lockdown? I’m also intrigued by the apparently low rates of infection in developing countries- I read something the other day about how the virus doesn’t seem to be sweeping through densely-populated Indian slums with poor sanitation. Many unanswered questions. 

People with underlying conditions or elderly are already dead?

1
 Luke90 10 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

And presumably a higher death rate in normal circumstances also makes it easier for any excess deaths due to corona virus to "blend in", especially as testing is presumably pretty limited.

 Luke90 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> If the counties with the tightest initial lockdowns will have a higher rate of increase post-lockdown?

Why would they? Presumably the rate of increase would depend primarily on how much restrictions are eased and how many existing infections there are as seeds. Up until the point where so many people have had it that herd immunity becomes a significant factor, which I don't think any country has really reached yet?

 Offwidth 10 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

An example from one Mumbai slum

"The life expectancy of people living around the dumping ground hovers at 39 years, as against an urban life expectancy of 73.5 years in the state."

https://india.mongabay.com/2019/04/people-in-this-mumbai-slum-barely-make-i...

 girlymonkey 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

Higher vitamin D levels as they all live and work outside? Less obesity and other lifestyle disease?

I would guess a massive mix of some health factors, like vit D, some deaths just not being registered and, as some stated above, death rates being high anyway and people not living long with other underlying health conditions.

It will be interesting to unravel all of these things in the future!

1
 mik82 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

It may well be in slums, just it wouldn't be tested for. You're also not going to find many obese men over the age of 60 in these places.

OP Yanis Nayu 10 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

A combination of that and greater immunity built up in the remaining population. There also what I’d imagine to be a greater rebound from tighter restrictions, by which I mean the more draconian the lockdown the more people will crave close contact, parties etc. and then act on it when the lockdown is eased. 

1
OP Yanis Nayu 10 May 2020
In reply to girlymonkey:

Another theory is that those living in poor conditions have more robust immune systems. I don’t know, but as you say “interesting” (albeit I want it over!). Hope you’re ok btw. 

1
 neilh 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

I suspect t that the healthcare infrastructure in slum area is not good enough to support any analysis. So sadly it is a bit meaningless to compare imho..This is a developed world “disease” so to speak. 

1
 off-duty 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

And to be fair they seem to be enforcing a lockdown there which is appears more stringent than here.

https://www.ft.com/content/5199e04b-d235-49e2-a20c-af7bb8fc53a9

 krikoman 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> A combination of that and greater immunity built up in the remaining population. There also what I’d imagine to be a greater rebound from tighter restrictions, by which I mean the more draconian the lockdown the more people will crave close contact, parties etc. and then act on it when the lockdown is eased. 


Where is you evidence of immunity build up, because the WHO were saying there is currently NO evidence that having had CV-19 you can't catch it again!

4
OP Yanis Nayu 10 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

It’s emphasis - there’s evidence that you do get immunity (I think) but for how long they’re not sure, but there’s also some evidence that you can get re-infected. I would imagine that the majority of people who have it and recover will have some immunity to it. The odd outlying case doesn’t mean there’s no such thing as immunity to it.  I could be wrong as I’m not sure - perhaps others can illuminate. 

1
 off-duty 10 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

> Where is you evidence of immunity build up, because the WHO were saying there is currently NO evidence that having had CV-19 you can't catch it again!

I think the general scientific consensus is that it "should" give you a degree of immunity, however there isn't any evidence to corroborate that - if you think about it the in vivo experiment would be fairly unethical....

 JLS 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> If the counties with the tightest initial lockdowns will have a higher rate of increase post-lockdown? I’m also intrigued by the apparently low rates of infection in developing countries- I read something the other day about how the virus doesn’t seem to be sweeping through densely-populated Indian slums with poor sanitation. Many unanswered questions. 

I doubt it will be a function the severity of the lockdown that will impact on the post-lockdown rate. More likely a function of the effectiveness of their track and trace system and the levels of infection when lockdown ends.

As for developing countries my theory is that might be down to lack of social contact between the classes and lack of seed cases in lower classes. However, I do worry that it will eventually get going to devastating effect. 

 krikoman 10 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

> I think the general scientific consensus is that it "should" give you a degree of immunity, however there isn't any evidence to corroborate that - if you think about it the in vivo experiment would be fairly unethical....


That's true, "it should" but there are probable / possible cases of people catching it twice, and no evidence that you can't, as yet. Even if there is immunity, it might not be very long lasting.

At the moment then, the only sure evidence we have of something that does work is, isolation, testing and tracking. All of which we've been pretty shit at in the UK

 krikoman 10 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> It’s emphasis - there’s evidence that you do get immunity (I think) but for how long they’re not sure, but there’s also some evidence that you can get re-infected. I would imagine that the majority of people who have it and recover will have some immunity to it.

Well the WHO are disagreeing with you on ANY immunity, at the moment at least, and again, you are using words like "I think", and "I would imagine" all a bit too vague for me and my families health.

I'm probably done now, so stay safe.

7
OP Yanis Nayu 10 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

You too.  

OP Yanis Nayu 10 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

Took me ages to find this, but worth a read:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1257392347010215947.html

 mondite 10 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

>  if you think about it the in vivo experiment would be fairly unethical....

You can still test the theory in various ways (most effective letting a country with more, shall we say, relaxed ethical standards committee manage it (of course you then have the issue of how much you can trust a country which has already proved itself to be ethically relaxed. Hi China!)).

Leaving that method aside its the same way you can test all vaccines for stuff you cant really expose people to. Just see what happens to the population as a whole and whether that test group behaves better. Admittedly it would be even harder to separate out but they should get some idea.

 Toerag 11 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

1) The demographic of people in the developing world means there are relatively few people to suffer badly from the disease.

2) Lots of people are 'off the radar' as far as healthcare goes and won't seek treatment.

3) The healthcare systems are rubbish - ravaged by war, or underfunded.

4) Poor leadership results in a lack of testing / reporting.

5) Lack of enclosed spaces to enhance the spread of the disease.

 The Norris 11 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> If the counties with the tightest initial lockdowns will have a higher rate of increase post-lockdown? I’m also intrigued by the apparently low rates of infection in developing countries- I read something the other day about how the virus doesn’t seem to be sweeping through densely-populated Indian slums with poor sanitation. Many unanswered questions. 

There was a video fairly early on about Ecuador, I think at the time there were relatively few deaths reported on worldometers etc, but the video describes many more dead bodies at hospitals, in houses etc, as they were unable to bury them quick enough. I hope this isnt true of other developing countries, but I guess it wouldn't be too much of a shock if it was.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-latin-america-52234127/coronavirus-ecua...

 DaveHK 11 May 2020
In reply to Luke90:

> And presumably a higher death rate in normal circumstances 

India has a lower crude death rate than the UK.

 Luke90 11 May 2020
In reply to DaveHK:

> India has a lower crude death rate than the UK.

But not in the "densely-populated Indian slums with poor sanitation" that the OP referred to, I would wager.

 DaveHK 11 May 2020
In reply to Luke90:

> But not in the "densely-populated Indian slums with poor sanitation" that the OP referred to, I would wager.

Perhaps not, it's just a common misconception perpetuated by highschool geography teachers that developing world countries have higher death rates. Some do but many don't.

Post edited at 07:45
 LeeWood 11 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

> That's true, "it should" but there are probable / possible cases of people catching it twice, and no evidence that you can't, as yet. Even if there is immunity, it might not be very long lasting.

Reinfection, relapse or inaqequate testing ?

https://www.wired.com/story/did-a-woman-get-coronavirus-twice-scientists-ar...

The only way to differentiate between a relapse—meaning the same coronavirus seemed to go away and came back—and reinfection, in which a second strain of coronavirus swooped in just as the first cleared out, is a full viral sequence.

NB. ... but if reinfection is possible ... 

And the spectre of reinfection raises a host of other potential problems. “If the natural infection doesn’t give you solid immunity, then we would start to worry about the effectiveness of a vaccine,” says Burke.

... so back to basic health measures ...

Wash your hands, and practice good cough etiquette.

Post edited at 09:31
Rigid Raider 11 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

My colleague living in Nigeria and my good customer in Sudan both tell me nobody knows how many are dying. One of Nigeria's dailies reported that a flight from Kano to Beirut was found to be carrying 25 Lebanese citizens who tested positive:

https://punchng.com/25-lebanese-evacuees-from-kano-test-positive-for-covid-...

I read that Italy has a median age of 47 and the UK 45 compared to Nigeria, which is 18, so a hugely young and fit population. There are far fewer Africans who are obese (now 61% of the UK population) although obesity and related problems like diabetes and hypertension are very common amongst wealthy middle-aged Africans who generally lead unhealthy lifestyles. So I would expect similar conditions to exist in developing countries like India.

 fred99 11 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

> Where is you evidence of immunity build up, because the WHO were saying there is currently NO evidence that having had CV-19 you can't catch it again!


In which case we're all f*ck*d anyway, so why are you bothering ?

Try looking on the bright side for once.

3
Pan Ron 11 May 2020
In reply to Offwidth:

> An example from one Mumbai slum

> "The life expectancy of people living around the dumping ground hovers at 39 years, as against an urban life expectancy of 73.5 years in the state."

TBF, I haven't read the link but I'd be careful of inferring a life low life expectancy implies many fewer elderly people.  It's quite likely it is heavily skewed downward by high infant mortality rate.

 daftdazza 11 May 2020
In reply to Rigid Raider:

Yeah the fact that only 3 Percent of African population being over 65 compared to 20 percent in Europe, will be a bigger factor im Africa eventually seeing less deaths than Europe, it's already been shown here, if your in good health, not overweight with pre existing health conditions and under 65 your chance of dieing or having severe illness is extremely small.   As people have already said, virus transmission outdoors in hot environment is likely to be negible, and population are less likely to be vitamin D deficient as in northern Europe. 

Countries like UK, Italy, Spain and Belgium that have been severely hit intitaly should be able to come out of lockdown easier as long as we have the virus suppressed to a low level first,  London maybe has lowest R level in UK due to highest proportion of population being intitaly infected, giving the community a small degree of immunity.

And If it turn out no one has immunity long term then I am not sure the current strategy of lock down then gradually easing of restrictions will work, the summer will probably give all countries in Europe some respite, but it will likely come back hard in Autumn and winter, probably hitting  countries with least built in immunity worse.  Obviously the science is not clear, so no one really knows yet, but that would be my best guess.

 SDM 11 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

> Where is you evidence of immunity build up, because the WHO were saying there is currently NO evidence that having had CV-19 you can't catch it again!

Given the large number of cases, there would be lots of evidence of reinfection if there was no immunity. The tiny number of people recovering then showing symptoms again is proof that there is some level of immunity.

This is not to say that having had it before will offer you long term immunity. Maybe the immunity only lasts a short period of time. Maybe the virus will mutate sufficiently for your immunity to no longer apply. It also seems likely that some people are experiencing a relapse of the initial infection rather than a reinfection.

 oldie 11 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> If the counties with the tightest initial lockdowns will have a higher rate of increase post-lockdown? <

If all lockdown measures cease isn't the rate of increase post lockdown completely independent of the tightness of the lockdown? After lockdown the initial rate of increase (in numbers of new infections per day) will just depend on R (which will be the same as before lockdown) and the number of potential transmitters left when lockdown was stopped.

Of course all this will be influenced by imposing any repeated or new restrictions. The new rate will most likely depend on the ability and willingness of a government to decide on and impose new restrictions (and the speed at which it detects a new rate increase). Will those who imposed an initial very strict lockdown be the most likely to do so a second time?      I'm definitely not knowledgeable about this in any way, and may well be wrong.

Post edited at 14:41
OP Yanis Nayu 11 May 2020
In reply to oldie:

> If all lockdown measures cease isn't the rate of increase post lockdown completely independent of the tightness of the lockdown? After lockdown the initial rate of increase (in numbers of new infections per day) will just depend on R (which will be the same as before lockdown) and the number of potential transmitters left when lockdown was stopped.

> Of course all this will be influenced by imposing any repeated or new restrictions. The new rate will most likely depend on the ability and willingness of a government to decide on and impose new restrictions (and the speed at which it detects a new rate increase). Will those who imposed an initial very strict lockdown be the most likely to do so a second time?      I'm definitely not knowledgeable about this in any way, and may well be wrong.

I guess the remaining pool of people to be infected is a relevant factor, although I’d imagine no country has had a high enough percentage of people already affected for that to be hugely significant. 

 krikoman 11 May 2020
In reply to SDM:

> Given the large number of cases, there would be lots of evidence of reinfection if there was no immunity. The tiny number of people recovering then showing symptoms again is proof that there is some level of immunity.

> This is not to say that having had it before will offer you long term immunity. Maybe the immunity only lasts a short period of time. Maybe the virus will mutate sufficiently for your immunity to no longer apply. It also seems likely that some people are experiencing a relapse of the initial infection rather than a reinfection.


And yet the WHO don't agree with you, https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/immunity-passports-in-the...

So where does that leave us? Should I believe you, or the WHO? It's a tricky one I'll grant you.

2
OP Yanis Nayu 11 May 2020
In reply to SDM:

A lot of what’s said in the media about mutation is alarmist, but some of what I’ve read gives me the impression that mutations often make a virus less severe rather than more, which makes sense from an evolutionary point of view I guess. Another point is that most viruses burn themselves out and disappear after a while - the flu, norovirus etc is very seasonal and comes and goes - it would be interesting to know whether Covid will follow a similar pattern. 

OP Yanis Nayu 11 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

An absence of evidence from an absence of studies isn’t proof that something doesn’t exist. If an immune response to a virus wasn’t a thing we wouldn’t have vaccines. WHO are commenting on a scheme that would need to GUARANTEE that the person holding the document is safe - that degree of confidence does not yet exist. You can’t extrapolate that to suit your pessimistic world view. 

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> A lot of what’s said in the media about mutation is alarmist, but some of what I’ve read gives me the impression that mutations often make a virus less severe rather than more, which makes sense from an evolutionary point of view I guess. Another point is that most viruses burn themselves out and disappear after a while. 

I gather the Spanish Flu did that. 

 Toerag 11 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

>Another point is that most viruses burn themselves out and disappear after a while - the flu, norovirus etc is very seasonal and comes and goes - it would be interesting to know whether Covid will follow a similar pattern. 

The question is:- why are they seasonal? Is it because they spread well indoors and people are indoors more in winter, or is it because sunlight kills the virus outside the body and there's more of it in summer, or is it something else?  Coronavirus seems to be transmitted easily in warm, sunny countries just as easily as cold, dull ones so the chance of a summer lull would appear to be slim.

In reply to Toerag:

Yes, I thought the broad scientific evidence so far suggests, sadly, that it's not seasonal. If it comes back worse in the autumn, it'll be nothing to do with the seasons, and all to do with, apparently, the way most pandemics in history have had double spikes.

 SouthernSteve 12 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

Your WHO quote is more about antibodies as a marker of immunity than getting the infection twice. There is currently very little evidence of second infection to the same virus. The virus may change, sometimes quite subtly over time and then reinfect and due to the possibility of this and prior immunity increasing the chance of damaging immune responses we may never have a totally effective vaccine. 

 wbo2 12 May 2020
In reply to SouthernSteve: I know a couple of people who have have caught Chickenpox several times as they don't develop immunity.  I would assume there are similar who simply won't become immune to Coronavirus.  I'd also bear in mind I have seen a vaccine for the common cold, and none was created for SARS although I believe that's because it went away.

I don't think , OP, that severity of lockdown has any impact on intensity of second spike.  If you have a harsh lockdown early then the disease is gone, locally.  It doesn't just appear from nowhere so remove it and it's a local nonproblem.  We currently have zero cases left  in the local  hospital - where would it come fron now? Presumably you're hoping that a slow response enables a degree of herd immunity to build up, but the UK isn't there, and I doubt anywhere else is

 krikoman 12 May 2020
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

>  You can’t extrapolate that to suit your pessimistic world view. 

And you can't produce NO proof or use optimism to overcome the facts.

 krikoman 12 May 2020
In reply to SouthernSteve:

> Your WHO quote is more about antibodies as a marker of immunity ....

I realise what the report says.

> There is currently very little evidence of second infection to the same virus.

There's even less that having had it you're immune, and less still on, if there is immunity how long it lasts.

 fred99 12 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

> I realise what the report says.

> There's even less that having had it you're immune, and less still on, if there is immunity how long it lasts.


So you're saying, and quoting the WHO as you're source, that no-one can EVER gain immunity from this virus which can and does kill.

Why don't you just walk around with a placard around your neck stating "The end is nigh, repent, repent".

If this is truly the case then we have but two choices;

A) We're ALL going to die of it, so we may as well have an almighty piss-up and at least go happy.

B) Round up everyone with it and indeed whoever has had it, kill them and burn their bodies in a high temperature Incinerator.

Personally I like to think that you're wrong, and the WHO is simply hedging their bets, otherwise people would go around deliberately catching it early so that they get treated when there's a lot of medical staff around (as per Bojo ?) and the world couldn't cope with that.

If you believe that you're 100% right, then please stop doing a John Lawrie/Dad's Army impression every time you post - we're doomed, doomed I say - as all it does is make people feel worse mentally, and if anyone on here does do anything "stupid" then you'll quite possibly be the cause.

 LeeWood 12 May 2020
In reply to fred99:

> Personally I like to think that you're wrong, and the WHO is simply hedging their bets

Bill Gates has a very definite agenda to vaccinate 7bn people. This has come out in several interviews so you can easily check it. His words have been repeated by a good handful of politicians (Trump included) so you can check this too. It is beginning to be accepted as the truth - but without any scientific basis.

These words 'from the top' are having an unjust influence on politics and decision making across the globe.

I'm sorry if this upsets some  

Post edited at 17:35
12
 SouthernSteve 12 May 2020
In reply to those that would like to understand the immunology and immunological questions (lots of which remain) about this virus you might like to read this which is a bit dry, but definitely interesting.

https://www.immunology.org/sites/default/files/Final_COVID-19_Immunology_re...

@britsocimm #ColourinCoronavirus

And resources for talking to children and young adults

https://www.immunology.org/coronavirus/connect-coronavirus-public-engagemen...

 DaveHK 12 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> Bill Gates...

youtube.com/watch?v=RoZ7JXkv6_o&

Post edited at 18:05
1
 Rob Exile Ward 12 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

Christ, did he turn you down for a job or something? I repeat - you are following the nonsense peddled by David Icke. If that is a situation you're comfortable with then I think that tells all of us all we need to know about the value of your contributions.

2
 SouthernSteve 12 May 2020
In reply to fred99:

> So you're saying, and quoting the WHO as your source, that no-one can EVER gain immunity from this virus which can and does kill.

Funny that they are giving plasma transfusions from recovered patients with some effect.

There are real misery guts on here today and just after I paid my £20. Outrageous. It's probably Bill Gates fault though.

1
Roadrunner6 12 May 2020
In reply to fred99:

We know there is immunity.

Its why convalescent plasma is working as a treatment. 

https://www.hematology.org/covid-19/covid-19-and-convalescent-plasma

WHO made a bad statement, they were sort of right but did not explain it well and later clarified. At the time there was no evidence of longterm immunity, NOT there was evidence of no longterm immunity. 

Post edited at 19:17
OP Yanis Nayu 12 May 2020
In reply to krikoman:

No, what I do is dig around, look at the research that’s coming out and choose to focus more on the research that’s optimistic and provides some hope, rather than revelling in the negativity. I’m not sure what you personally gain from your negativity but perhaps you could keep it to yourself and stop dragging other people down with you. 

 LeeWood 12 May 2020
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> Christ, did he turn you down for a job or something? I repeat - you are following the nonsense peddled by David Icke. If that is a situation you're comfortable with then I think that tells all of us all we need to know about the value of your contributions.

Would you care to inform me which specific terms or phrases you object to in my post ? Is it feasible to make objective discussion over the activities and intentions of Bill Gates without getting wound up ?

I do not follow David Icke's theories or news commentary.

2
 Rob Exile Ward 12 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

I f*cking object to the fact that you slag off a couple whose philanthropic activities I've been following for 20+ years, have increasingly admired , and watched as they have leveraged their extraordinary talents - it's not THAT easy to become the richest people in the world, you may know different - to alleviating inequality and poverty.

How are they doing that?

By providing low tech solutions to infant mortality and facilitating low cost birth control. How big pharma is that?

WTF is your problem? 

Post edited at 21:29
4
 SouthernSteve 12 May 2020
In reply to wbo2:

Vaccines for SARS and MERS were developed, but never made it past animal trials. They were not without complications. 
 

 LeeWood 12 May 2020
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

So your admiration for these people makes them inscrutable ?

I believe there are more than a few christians on this forum - who all have to endure derisive terminology in reference to an entity they hold sacred. Your use of the name 'Christ' is offensive, as is that of the f-word.

I have not used any such language about Bill Gates, so why are you trying to shut dialogue down ? Your reactions alone are sufficient to raise suspicion. 

Post edited at 21:34
5
 off-duty 12 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

So are you against a vaccine, or by just against a vaccine facilitated by Gates' philanthropy?

And more importantly when it's produced will you be having one?

 LeeWood 12 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

> So are you against a vaccine, or by just against a vaccine facilitated by Gates' philanthropy?

> And more importantly when it's produced will you be having one?

Why  should it be important to know my opinions before discussing the facts about Gates activities and intentions ? 

4
 Rob Exile Ward 12 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

For the record - can the MMR vaccine cause autism? Yes or no?

2
 SouthernSteve 12 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> Why  should it be important to know my opinions before discussing the facts about Gates activities and intentions ? 

He’s a policeman. He can’t solve a crime without understanding the motive!

1
 LeeWood 12 May 2020
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> For the record - can the MMR vaccine cause autism? Yes or no?

so you can pigeonhole me ?

I'm not on this thread to discuss Bill Gates with you; why don't you simply ignore contributions which displease you ? The rest of us do this at all times.

Unless someone else shows positive motivation to discuss BG without getting into a flap, then I will desist, and draw my own conclusions on the phenomena of massed denial which is shaping both science and politics  

6
 HardenClimber 12 May 2020
In reply to wbo2:

Are you sure?

Several times?

There are conditions like Pityriasis lichenoides et varioliformis acuta which are the usual cause for what is thought to be repeated episodes of chickenpox. Obv pple with immune problems can get recurrent disseminated shingles, and occassional people get two episodes (eg when first episode was in presence of maternal antibodies. People who don't develope immunity to chickenpox tend to die.

 Ridge 12 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> Bill Gates has a very definite agenda to vaccinate 7bn people.

The bastard, going around trying to improve immunity to infectious diseases.

 wbo2 13 May 2020
In reply to HardenClimber: Re. chickenpox - yes, very sure.  Or at least I was.  Happy to be wrong here

I would have thought such an unfortunate wouldn't die, as with care it would be avoidable. I had it as an adult, wouldn't like to repeat the experience

Bill Gates next crime will be to relieve poverty.  Lee, you get stick as you believe all sorts of nonsense.  

1
 LeeWood 13 May 2020
In reply to wbo2:

> Bill Gates next crime will be to relieve poverty.  Lee, you get stick as you believe all sorts of nonsense.  

It is becoming increasingly evident that there is a posse of forum members who lobby -  anyone airing or questioning the 'inscrutable and blameless' activities of Bill gates, the WHO, and vaccine technology.

The drug companies complicit with these developments are alone known to indulge in such lobbying in government - but now to have such influencers present within social media also ? 

we may be less optimistic for tattered democratic freedom - with due reason  

9
 Rob Exile Ward 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

If you believe that MMR causes autism then you have already pigeonholed yourself.

The 'evidence' that you have cited to date has been risible, and puts you in the same boat as David Icke. I wonder how much digging we'll have to do before we expose the truth, that this is all part of a Jewish conspiracy masterminded by Buffet and George Soros?

2
 summo 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

Hasn't a big evil drug company offered to produced drugs for the Oxford research group at cost, ie zero profit. They are even taking a risk starting producing some now, so if the trials are successful they've got a head start. The UK head of company said their goal wasn't to make any money from the drug and that if it worked they'd probably role it out to poorer nations in Africa below cost. 

 DaveHK 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> It is becoming increasingly evident that there is a posse of forum members who lobby - 

It's interesting how you were accusing others of pigeon holing you and yet you're quite willing to pigeon hole others...

I don't see anyone saying Gates/WHO etc are blameless or inscrutable, that would be silly. What people are arguing against is all the conspiracy theory nonsense surrounding them. Which is shouting at the moon really for all the difference it will make.

Post edited at 09:02
1
 off-duty 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> Why  should it be important to know my opinions before discussing the facts about Gates activities and intentions ? 

I'm not asking for your opinions, I'm asking about your intentions.

(Incidentally, just for clarity - what you have been posting is your "opinion" of the "facts" about Gates activities and intentions.)

1
 off-duty 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> It is becoming increasingly evident that there is a posse of forum members who lobby -  anyone airing or questioning the 'inscrutable and blameless' activities of Bill gates, the WHO, and vaccine technology.

> The drug companies complicit with these developments are alone known to indulge in such lobbying in government - but now to have such influencers present within social media also ? 

> we may be less optimistic for tattered democratic freedom - with due reason  

I notice you have expanded your position to include "vaccine technology" - could you clarify what your concerns are there?

 fred99 13 May 2020
In reply to Roadrunner6 and Southern Steve:

> We know there is immunity.

> Its why convalescent plasma is working as a treatment. 

> WHO made a bad statement, they were sort of right but did not explain it well and later clarified. At the time there was no evidence of longterm immunity, NOT there was evidence of no longterm immunity. 

I'm with that, it's Krikoman and his constant stream of doom that I was having a go at.

 SouthernSteve 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

People who don't believe in vaccination in general, as you appear to do,  should keep it to themselves. They are otherwise complicit with one of the most scandalous movements in modern times that has seen increases in diseases that could otherwise be controlled or eradicated. The MMR doctor should be in prison not just struck off. 

Even Trump had to reverse his ambiguity for measles earlier this year as he saw the impact that this was having. 

1
 LeeWood 13 May 2020
In reply to DaveHK:

> What people are arguing against is all the conspiracy theory nonsense surrounding them.

Known conspiracy theories surrounding BG and coronavirus pandemic:

  • He engineered the hole thing
  • He wants to inject ID micro-chips
  • He wants to use vaccines as population control
  • He own's a patent for the virus ie. he created it 
  • --- add any others known ??

I am not interested in any of this, but yes I am openly critical to vaccine mass marketing techniques esp as now in the pandemic. If I cross the line into a known conspiracy feel free to call me out.

The Agenda, The Intention:

// The wealthy Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation called Wednesday (15 April) for global cooperation to ready COVID-19 vaccines for seven billion people, while offering $150 million toward developing therapeutics and treatments for the virus. //

Conflict with science:

// “There are seven billion people on the planet,” he said. “We are going to need to vaccinate nearly every one. //

https://www.euractiv.com/section/health-consumers/news/gates-foundation-cal...

> (Incidentally, just for clarity - what you have been posting is your "opinion" of the "facts" about Gates activities and intentions.) - from off-duty

Which of these - agenda, intention or conflict are my opinion ?

7
 LeeWood 13 May 2020
In reply to summo:

> The UK head of company said their goal wasn't to make any money from the drug and that if it worked they'd probably role it out to poorer nations in Africa below cost. 

Sounds great. Maybe you should look into the ethics of testing in developing countries - which are lightly branded 'cost effective locations' :

// Until now, pharmaceutical companies themselves have acted under cloak and dagger, not telling us just how many test subjects have suffered ill effects, so that we can stop a headache, or  have better sex, or sleep more soundly.//

// One of the most commonly cited ethical qualms with clinical trials tends to be misinformation. While sometimes it is a case of "lost in translation," there are even more dubious cases of misrepresentation at work. In Kano, Nigeria Pfizer tested a new drug called trovafloxacin on children infected with meningitis without informing their parents; five died in treatment. While this case dates back to 1996, deceptive research practice is still alive and well. //

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/02/testing-drugs-on-the-dev...

// A major excuse for moving clinical trials abroad has been the larger accessibility of “naive” participants – drug-free bodies that allow for unadulterated test conditions. But it’s the vulnerability of subjects that can make them more attractive. Fewer regulatory safeguards, high levels of poverty and illiteracy, combined with an almost blind faith in Western medicine, provide an almost endless supply of “willing” volunteers in countries such as Africa, China, India and parts of Eurasia. Injury or death as a result of misconduct is hard to prove and even harder to prosecute. //

https://www.thecitizen.in/index.php/en/NewsDetail/index/8/11813/Unethical-D...

4
 DaveHK 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

Sorry,I can't really reply to your post as the first bit makes no sense whatsoever and the second bit is directed at another poster.

 off-duty 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

I'm aware that the Gates foundation are looking to drive and fund, both the development of novel vaccines and then the production and distribution of them. It's hardly a secret. In fact it's front page news.

Your opinion appears to be that this is a bad thing.  Or at the very least this is a deceitful  ruse by Gates to make even more money for himself. I'm not clear if you believe the whole foundation is just a money making tool for Gates - but nevertheless, should you think that, it's still an "opinion".

I'm still interested to know if you'll be getting vaccinated? 

 off-duty 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

All very interesting, and quite rightly a massive ethical issue if not straightforward unethical, however the point being made was that these vaccines having been tested would be rolled out to poorer countries at below costs.

 SouthernSteve 13 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

> I'm still interested to know if you'll be getting vaccinated? 

The ultimate test of belief? You are bitten by a rabid dog on the foot. Do you get vaccinated or not? 

How would any sane person respond?


 

1
 wbo2 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:OKay - why is global innoculation against such a virus a bad thing?

Or any other diseases.  Or do you just think they're 'god's way'?

 LeeWood 13 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

> All very interesting, and quite rightly a massive ethical issue if not straightforward unethical, however the point being made was that these vaccines having been tested would be rolled out to poorer countries at below costs.

In general thats not the way it works - because quite simply 'life is cheaper' in the developing countries. I can't cite for the Oxford group testing but I doubt they are clean. There are several levels of test, if testing was complete then it could be rolled out in parallel to all/several countries. Refer back to theatlantic to understand the scale of this practice.

// These clinical trials for new medications take place all over the world, but developing countries often serve as cost effective locations.// theatlantic

> Your opinion appears to be that this is a bad thing.  Or at the very least this is a deceitful  ruse by Gates to make even more money for himself. I'm not clear if you believe the whole foundation is just a money making tool for Gates - but nevertheless, should you think that, it's still an "opinion".

The declaration 'that the world cannot return to normal until 7bn are vaccinated' is what concerns me.  It implies compulsory  treatment - if you want to travel ? or even get a haircut ? It further carries with it a notion of proof for such treatment; as we all know, fluttery bits of paper are easily lost.

It's not entireIy clear to me what BG's motives are, but it is a fact that however much he (or BMGF) give away, his personal fortunes still increase. So, he's found clever ways to be very generous as well as getting to No.2

I can't stop BG making money and any individual country is not obliged to take his or the WHOs advice ? BUT as reiterated - basic health and clamp down on ultra-processed foodstuffs WOULD make significant impact on mortality with cv19. So, if this is ignored, but vaccination remains in focus - what must we think ?

> I'm still interested to know if you'll be getting vaccinated? 

The evidence is out - that natural immunity in healthy individuals can cope with the virus - which according to many sources now is little more than 'a severe winter flu'. I'm 90% certain to have had it already - and so should have natural immunity. I should therefore have no need for the vaccine.

6
 off-duty 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> In general thats not the way it works - because quite simply 'life is cheaper' in the developing countries. I can't cite for the Oxford group testing but I doubt they are clean. There are several levels of test, if testing was complete then it could be rolled out in parallel to all/several countries. Refer back to theatlantic to understand the scale of this practice.

> // These clinical trials for new medications take place all over the world, but developing countries often serve as cost effective locations.// theatlantic

You're literally just repeating yourself. I think you'd struggle to find anyone who would disagree - exploiting poorer countries in order to circumvent safety standards of vaccine testing is bad.

That doesn't mean vaccines are bad, and that isn't what is being suggested here.

> > Your opinion appears to be that this is a bad thing.  Or at the very least this is a deceitful  ruse by Gates to make even more money for himself. I'm not clear if you believe the whole foundation is just a money making tool for Gates - but nevertheless, should you think that, it's still an "opinion".

> The declaration 'that the world cannot return to normal until 7bn are vaccinated' is what concerns me.  It implies compulsory  treatment - if you want to travel ? or even get a haircut ? It further carries with it a notion of proof for such treatment; as we all know, fluttery bits of paper are easily lost.

I personally don't read this as a "compulsory treatment" signal.  Mass vaccination is going to be the most realistic way if stamping out this disease. I disagree with Gates regarding vaccinating the whole world - I think it can probably be pretty much if not entirely eradicated by lots of vaccinations followed by targeted vaccinations encircling out breaks, in a similar way to other successful vaccination programs.

I can envisage some form of certification possibly be being enforced - a bit like compulsory vaccinations for trips to certain countries. Case in point - Australia has pretty much eliminated it - I could see the Australian government insisting on some sort of certificate for travellers.

> It's not entireIy clear to me what BG's motives are, but it is a fact that however much he (or BMGF) give away, his personal fortunes still increase. So, he's found clever ways to be very generous as well as getting to No.2

Fair enough, you doubt his motives. Personally, if I was a billionaire I can think of much more effective ways of increasing my fortune than giving it away and investing it in schemes that are "blue sky"/high risk of failure (where success is measured as being effective, rather than turning a profit)

> I can't stop BG making money and any individual country is not obliged to take his or the WHOs advice ? BUT as reiterated - basic health and clamp down on ultra-processed foodstuffs WOULD make significant impact on mortality with cv19. So, if this is ignored, but vaccination remains in focus - what must we think ?

> The evidence is out - that natural immunity in healthy individuals can cope with the virus - which according to many sources now is little more than 'a severe winter flu'. I'm 90% certain to have had it already - and so should have natural immunity. I should therefore have no need for the vaccine.

Aah. Another subtext (I notice you never expanded on vaccine technology). Now we have "basic health" and "healthy individuals" it's that creeping implicit suggestion that if you aren't "healthy" it's probably your own fault. And if it's your own fault, well, you probably deserve it.

Reinforced by the suggestion about ultraprocessed food. Which is, basically, bollocks. A confusion between correlation and causation. Not to mention in the definition of "ultraprocessed". All of which feeds in to a "clean living", Instagram, body fascist, selfishness - "I'm alright Jack".

As for it being "no more serious than the flu". Playing the percentage game, you'll probably be okay - but then again you could be one of the 3% otherwise healthy people, who for some reason, as yet unknown, end up in hospital, maybe subject to an internal cytokine storm, or other wrecking ball impact of this virus, who end up on a ventilator for weeks, and come out with long term health problems.

And if you are one of them I bet you'll be happy to get out of hospital for your first ultra processed beer and kebab.

Edit to add : So I'll take that as a "maybe" for the vaccine. And a "yes" if the promised antibody tests come back negative for you...?

Post edited at 19:02
 Gemmazrobo 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

 Not quite sure why expressing concern over giving an individual organisation control to immunize a global population is being so down voted.

Ownership and patents over vaccines and drugs is a massive global health issue. Take the case with the soaring costs of insulin now, even if the inventor was well intentioned and adamant it was not for profit, and access universal. People die even in wealthy country like the US because of this.

Any potential failures in manufacturing would be catastrophic and permanently damage public trust, such as in China 2018. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31695-7/....

Implementation of vaccines in developing countries historically and currently has a whole host of ethical issues and political ones and needs be approached incredibly carefully. The Nigerian boycott of Polio vaccine was a another unfortunate example of these challenges. The potential to damage views towards future health intervention is also very pertinent.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1831725/

You don't have to be antivax to argue any action should be under intense scrutiny from international bodies. 

Post edited at 19:12
3
 off-duty 13 May 2020
In reply to Gemmazrobo:

> You don't have to be antivax to argue any action should be under intense scrutiny from international bodies. 

Have the Gates Foundation suggested that they intend to circumvent any scrutiny? 

 LeeWood 13 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

> Have the Gates Foundation suggested that they intend to circumvent any scrutiny? 

You must have missed this in a recent post:

https://www.vox.com/2015/6/10/8760199/gates-foundation-criticism

Foundations (and not just BMGF), by their v nature , are inscrutable

But there's plenty more food for though in this article 

Post edited at 19:58
5
 LeeWood 13 May 2020
In reply to off-duty:

> Reinforced by the suggestion about ultraprocessed food. Which is, basically, bollocks. A confusion between correlation and causation. Not to mention in the definition of "ultraprocessed". All of which feeds in to a "clean living", Instagram, body fascist, selfishness - "I'm alright Jack".

If you look back at the post Germany infections rise, at 8:15 Mon I made a post with relevant content. Government info. Inaction == neglect of - among other things education and clampdown on lobbies - mfrs which profit from feeding junk food to people.

Individuals can't be held responsible. If I 'was alright jack' I would just shut up and live in a teapot. Until we recognise how and in which ways democracy has been breached, we will have no knowledge or motivation to petition government to assert our collective rights.

The figures are all there for non-communicable diseases. The admission of inaction. The connection with cv19 mortality has come out repeatedly.

Gross complacency !

4
 LeeWood 13 May 2020
In reply to Gemmazrobo:

> Take the case with the soaring costs of insulin now, even if the inventor was well intentioned and adamant it was not for profit, and access universal. People die even in wealthy country like the US because of this.

If people die from expense of insulin supplies, is that a problem of money or social insurance ? 

OR

they are dying because they have diabetes - an NCD which is largely preventable if dietary education and food processing was controlled - for the good of the individual ?

Please consult my post at 8:15 Mon in Germany Infections Rise. This is a paper for the UK but USA probs are the same if not worse. USA citizens are averagely more obese and obesity leads to diabetes.

4
 LeeWood 13 May 2020
In reply to off-duty & Gemmazrobo:

The cv19 diet linked mortality rate is real - explored by Aseem Malhotra in this article. If you haven't got a subscription for The Telegraph, you can find info elsewhere on the web under this doctor's name:

Dr Aseem Malhotra is an NHS Cardiologist and Professor of Evidence Based Medicine.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/time-honest-conversation-ri...

1
 seankenny 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> It is becoming increasingly evident that there is a posse of forum members who lobby -  anyone airing or questioning the 'inscrutable and blameless' activities of Bill gates, the WHO, and vaccine technology.

> The drug companies complicit with these developments are alone known to indulge in such lobbying in government - but now to have such influencers present within social media also ? 

 

Hey could anyone on the Soros/Rothschild/Gates payroll message me? I’m articulate and fancy some extra cash. 

> we may be less optimistic for tattered democratic freedom - with due reason  

Thank god democracy has defendants like Lee!

 Gemmazrobo 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

Type 1 diabetes isn't a NCD. Type 2 isn't often treated with insulin. 

Social insurance is a different issue which contributes. How healthcare insurance runs in the US is massively complex and problematic.

However, patent ownership and big pharma monopolizing has resulted in a skyrocketing of insulin prices in the last 10 years. As a result people die from lack of access. This happens irrespective on insurance companies.

https://msfaccess.org/century-neglect-challenges-access-insulin-diabetes-ca...

https://www.businessinsider.com/insulin-prices-increase-2016-9?r=US&IR=...

 Gemmazrobo 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

I'm not sure I ever said anything refuting diabetes and obesity association with corona mortality. Maybe I should've been more clear.

My point about insulin prices was highlighting the scary potential problems that can arise from an private organisation owning or controlling medicines. The inventor of insulin as treatment for diabetes firmly wanted his discovery to be accessible for all, refusing to profit from the patent. A century later this is not the case, and other organisations clearly do. Even if BG had great intentions (in which his views on ownership are muddy) and allows, for example an open patent, if BMFG have control over a vaccine, the openess and accessibility of it in the future could change.

Post edited at 21:23
1
 off-duty 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

The suggestion that obesity is linked to "ultraprocessed" food is not proven.

The papers that have been used to indicate health issues relating to "ultraprocessed food" weren't looking at obesity.

The papers weren't able to separate correlation and causation.

The papers had a loose definition of "ultraprocessed". 

The research has however fed into the whole "clean living" pseudoscience bollocks much beloved of Instagram.

I couldn't make much sense of the rest of your post, other than you appear to accept that health problems are not a self inflicted issue, and that you don't operate purely as an individual.

Hopefully you will then accept we have some responsibility to the rest of society - which includes those with health problems. That means we should participate in schemes such as vaccination, to ensure we don't unnecessarily put them at risk.

 off-duty 13 May 2020
In reply to LeeWood:

> The cv19 diet linked mortality rate is real - explored by Aseem Malhotra in this article. If you haven't got a subscription for The Telegraph, you can find info elsewhere on the web under this doctor's name:

> Dr Aseem Malhotra is an NHS Cardiologist and Professor of Evidence Based Medicine.

The link between obesity and CV19 fatality appears real. This may simply be a matter of obese people not being able to lie prone in their front to ease respiration, nevertheless the link appears to be there.

What isn't clear is the link between "ultraprocessed" food and obesity. Despite what the clean-living instagrammers wish for.


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...